W3C XML Protocol Working Group teleconference, 15 May 2002

1. Roll

Present 28/25 Excused Regrets Absent

2. Agenda review, and AOB

No items.


3. Approval of May 8 telcon minutes

No objections to approving posted minutes.


4. Review action items


5. Status reports.

-- Primer
Nilo: Nothing to be reported. No Additions. One or two examples may need to
be updated to reflect the resolutions of
issues 194 and 195. Since the April review, the changes have been minor
with no real text changes.
DavidF: will send a call to the WG to review the primer.

-- Spec
Editors: No major changes. Need to include 194 and 195 resolutions and the
resolution of issues in this telecon. The
editors will attempt to generate "redlined" docs to reflect any updates to
yesterday's snapshot.

Nothing to report. Have not met recently.

-- Conformance work
Anish: The latest version was sent out just before the telecon. About 10 to
15 tests are still to be completed. The WG will
need to review version 5.0 of the test cases.
DavidF: will send a call for reviewing this document.

-- Usage Scenarios
JohnI: nothing new to report.

-- Requirements document
BobL: nothing new to report

-- Email binding
Yves will post the version located at [200] to the webpage. There is a
response to it from Mark Baker which will be added
to the Last Call issues list. Highland will send the comment to the XMLP
comments mailing list to ensure the issue is logged.
Yves will create a last call issue list.


6. Loose ends.

ChrisF: Has proposed to include a text mentioning the application/xml+soap
media type [201]
Henrik: this text could be added to section 1.2.
DavidF: any objection to accepting the proposal?
No objections rasised.
DavidF: the proposal is accepted.


7. LC and F2F planning.

For details of all the options considered see [100].
The working group decided to go with option 'C', i.e. the F2F will take
place July 16-18.
Our hosts for the postponed meeting (SAP) in Palo Alto will likely be able
to host a July meeting. They will check for next week.


8. Remaining active issues

-- proposal from TBTF [10] for handling HTTP versions (per item #1 in [8])
DavidF: any objection to closing this issue with the proposal described in
No objections raised.
DavidF: issue is closed with this resolution.

-- proposal to change description of rpc:ProcedureNotPresent subcode usage.
Original proposal, s/MUST/MAY/ in [11], and there seems to be general
support for making further clarifications as described in [12].
DavidF: is there any objection to closing the issue by changing MUST to MAY
as listed in the original proposal [11]?
No objections raised.
DavidF: the issue is closed with this resolution.

The following three were considered together:
-- proposal from TBTF (item #3 in [8]) for update to description of HTTP
code 204 [7]
-- proposal from TBTF to choose option (b) for resolving HTTP code 202,
(item #4 in [8])
-- proposal from TBTF (text pending) to address restricted req-resp nature
of HTTP binding, (item #5 in [8])
General agreement to resolve these issues by saying that (i) our MEP and
HTTP binding do not handle 204 and
202 codes because the MEP assumes SOAP messages in both the request and
response, (ii) other MEPs may embody
other assumptions such that a SOAP message is not expected as a response,
and these MEPs may handle 202 and 204
error codes.
ChrisF will provide such text the morning of May 16. If there is no
substantive objection to his proposal by Friday May 17, 5PM
Pacific time, the text will be accepted as the resolution to the issue.

[1] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/Admin/#pending
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-protocol-wg/2002Apr/0180.html
[3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-protocol-wg/2002Apr/0067.html
[7] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/1/10/11/soap12-part2.html#http-reqbindreqstate

[8] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-protocol-wg/2002May/0030.html
[10] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2002May/0015.html
[11] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2002May/0004.html
[12] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2002May/0027.html

[100] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-protocol-wg/2002May/0087.html
[101] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2002May/0022.html
[200] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2002May/0063.html
[201] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-protocol-wg/2002May/0084.html